Gangs of Looters

The Sunday, 1/3/10, Detroit Free Press has an article by Associated Press writer Don Babwin titled “Firms skimping on jobs are losing their tax breaks”. It could just as easily read “Extortion victims trying to hold on to their money are making thieves angry.” It starts with::

“Cash-strapped communities have a message for corporations that promised jobs in return for tax breaks: A deal’s a deal.”

And:

“As the economy sputters along, municipalities struggling to fix roads, fund schools and pay bills increasingly are rescinding tax abatements to companies that don’t hire enough workers, that lay them off or that close shop. At the same time, governments are sharpening new deals, leaving no doubt what is expected.”

That’s right. It’s like taking money from a Mafia Don, you better know what’s expected. Leaving aside the wisdom of government controlled roads and schools I want to point out that in any “deal” between a man with a gun (communities) and a man with money but without a gun (corporations), it is the man with the gun who will set and control the terms of all such “deals.” Once a corporation understands this it can then know its proper course of action: find a less hostile state and move there. Mr Babwin gives an example of one such deal:

“”We will roll out the red carpet as much as we can,” but “they are going to honor the contract,” said Brendon Gallagher, an alderman in DeKalb, Ill., where Target Corp. got abatements from the city, county, school district and other taxing bodies after promising at least 500 jobs at a local distribution center.
“

Please notice that when these gangs of gangs (taxing bodies) give back some of the loot or promise not to rob them for a few years, they are rolling “out the red carpet.” So what did Target do with its red carpet treatment?

“So when the company came up 66 workers short in 2009, Target found its next tax bill would jump almost $600,000 — more than half of which goes to the local school district.”

So we see that Target came through with 434 jobs but because they fell short by 66 jobs the spoiled brats in this gang stamped their feet and slammed target with a $600,000 club. Obviously these thugs couldn’t care less about the rights of businessmen. But the truth is they really don’t care about jobs either. In the mind of a pragmatist there is no connection between a $600,000 loss and Target’s ability to hire a few more workers. Notice the statement at the end of that quote; the fact that half the loot will go to schools I suppose is justification for the looting. In their mind Target will always be able to create jobs. How? Blank out. And when they don’t they must be punished. After all, they won’t get any sympathy from the public either.

“”The public is a lot more aware of tax abatements and there’s a climate of skepticism about what can be perceived as corporate handouts,” said Geoff McKimm, a member of the Monroe County Council in Indiana.”

So we see that the government, aided by a cheer leading media, has the public believing that tax breaks and abatements are “red carpet” treatments as well as “corporate handouts”. This means that the joint has been cased, lookouts are all in place (the press) and now it’s time for the thieving gangs to move in for more control.

“With that in mind, county officials drew up an agreement with Printpack, a packaging company, which includes a provision requiring the company to refund either $197,000 or that year’s abatement, whichever is more, if the number of employees at a new factory falls below 140.

Another provision requires Printpack to refund the entire abatement if it employs fewer than 75 people — a guarantee meant to prevent companies from leaving a skeleton crew at a location to avoid paying up”

Yep, we can’t let the producers have any way to protect themselves from our government enforced good intentions. Our good intentions are so noble that we are willing to fight each other over who has dibs on any given producer at any given time.

“In Detroit, while the state was approving expanded tax credits in exchange for General Motors Co.’s promise not to move, the Detroit City Council was talking about cracking down on tax breaks for GM and other major employers.”

But some of these gangs (taxing bodies) seem to be getting a bit uneasy in that maybe they ought to tread more lightly.

Some communities crack down on companies quietly, out of concern that they could scare off other potential employers, said Greg LeRoy, executive director of Good Jobs First.
He said that fear persists even though there is no evidence that having or enforcing clawbacks poisons the business climate.

The fact that they see a need to act quietly means that they know they are acting against the producers interests and that they see no other way to achieve their idea of the good except by the forced suffering of others. And if the people are unwilling to sacrifice voluntarily, then the government must step in and forcefully collect those sacrifices.

Now I don’t know anything about Good Jobs First but judging by their name they don’t know that good jobs come third. After a scientist or inventor comes up with a new product first then a businessman decides to market it second, then hires workers to make it third. But I digress.

To stop the sacrifice of the greatest nation on earth, the government must be reduced to its proper function of protecting every individual’s unalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Just calling for limited government won’t do it. Only a full commitment to individual rights can turn this country around. A good place to start is the rights of businessmen.

National Security Workforce to Address ‘Intersectionality’: do you ever get the sense that you’re in a waking nightmare? Money quote from the memo: “Our greatest asset in protecting the homeland and advancing our interests abroad is the talent and diversity of our national security workforce.”

Last Week Tonight on Donald Trump: bit long, but great takedown of the Trump mythos. In a more rational political environment, this would have killed his presidential campaign. I’m not sure it’ll make any difference.

A Responsibility I Take Seriously: nominee must be “without any particular ideology or agenda” and have “a keen understanding that justice is not about abstract legal theory, nor some footnote in a dusty casebook.” I sure hope the Republicans can hold the line on his nominations.

Trigger Warnings in Annapolis: I’m not sure why I expected the service academies to be bastions of academic freedom, but I did. It’s much worse than the universities since they’re far more hierarchical.

Announcing the Twitter Trust & Safety Council: this is within their rights, of course. Given the leftist leanings of the company and its assembled Council of Goodspeech, I suspect that some groups will get a pass and some will face suppression. Chilling at any rate.